Air Pollution

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the overall change in UK carbon dioxide emissions has been since 1997, taking 1997 as a base figure of 100; and what the change in carbon dioxide emissions from (a) industry, (b) domestic sector, (c) transport, (d) road transport and (e) air transport have been since 1997, taking 1997 as a base figure of 100.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 1 March 2005
	The following table contains the rebased carbon dioxide emission from 1997 to 2002. The figures are based on the 2004 official inventory ("UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, 1990 to 2002") using new factors for Gas and Power Station Coal (Scenario 2 and 6) to be in line with the "Review of the UK Climate Change Programme Consultation Paper". The total decrease in carbon dioxide from 1997 to 2002 is 1.1 per cent.
	
		
			  1997 2002 
		
		
			 (a) Industry(1) 100 102.6 
			 (b) Domestic sector 100 105.2 
			 (c) Transport(2) 100 98.8 
			 (d) Road transport 100 100.7 
			 (e) Air transport(3) 100 113.6 
			 (f) Other sources(4) 100 88.7 
			 Total 100 98.9 
		
	
	(1) Includes energy industries and industrial processes
	(2) Includes all domestic transport (incl. domestic aviation and domestic shipping only)
	(3) Domestic aviation only (excl. international aviation)
	(4) Includes businesses and land use change emissions (excl. landuse change removals)

Avian Flu

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what safeguards she has put in place to prevent the importation and spread of avian flu; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what steps she has taken to ensure that imports of poultry from countries with known outbreaks of avian flu are safe; what inspections are made of foodstuffs imported from such countries; and if she will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: If there is an outbreak of disease in an exporting country, Community legislation allows member states to take appropriate emergency safeguard action, which may include a ban on imports of animal products from all, or parts, of that country, pending emergency action at Community level. Once Community measures are put in place the safeguard measures will reflect them. Safeguard measures are currently in place to ban or restrict imports of meat and other animal products of susceptible species in respect of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Cambodia, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Pakistan, the People's Republic of China, including the Territory of Hong Kong, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam and South Africa and Newcastle Disease in Bulgaria
	All poultry meat and products derived from birds imported from third countries must be accompanied by veterinary certification. As laid down in Community law.
	All live birds, poultry meat and poultry meat products imported from third countries must be accompanied by a licence and/or veterinary certification. This confirms that the birds are not derived from an area where there has been an outbreak of Avian Influenza or Newcastle disease; it also confirms that live birds have not been vaccinated against Newcastle disease; show no clinical signs of disease and are fit to travel.
	Post imports of live poultry, or eggs once hatched, must be held in quarantine for six weeks in an approved establishment.
	All poultry meat and birds imported into the EU from third countries must enter at designated Border Inspection Posts where they are subject to veterinary inspections. All consignments are subject to documentary and identity checks. At least 20 per cent. of consignments of animal products undergo physical checks, and a number of animals in each consignment are physically checked. These checks ensure import conditions are met.

Beef Market

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the impact of the withdrawal of (a) the over-30-month scheme and (b) other beef subsidies on the UK beef market.

Alun Michael: The information is as follows:
	(a) Defra commissioned a report from the MLC entitled "Impact of OTM Exit on the UK Market" which is regularly updated as market conditions change. This describes the expected impact on the market of over-30-month cattle, cattle born after August 1996 when they return to the food chain after the OTM rule is replaced by a robust system of BSE testing.
	(b) Defra have commissioned a number of reports examining the impact of the change in the support arrangements for agricultural production as a result of CAP reform. These are collated on Defra's website. The impact on the UK beef production industry is covered in these reports.

Bovine TB

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will publish a Government strategy for the (a) control and (b) eradication of bovine TB from the British herd.

Ben Bradshaw: The "Government Strategic Framework for the Sustainable Control of Bovine Tuberculosis in Great Britain" was published on 1 March.
	The strategic framework focuses on what is achievable in the control of bovine TB in a 10 year timeframe. Whilst eradication is desirable we believe it is not achievable in 10 years.

Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what information she has received from the Chairperson of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) concerning (a) the suspension of Dr. Keith Baverstock from the Committee and (b) the current status of Professor David Ball on CoRWM; and if she will make a statement on progress made to date by CoRWM in meeting its planned timetable.

Elliot Morley: CoRWM's sponsoring Ministers in Defra and the devolved administrations have jointly commissioned a review with the terms of reference:
	"To consider (i) concerns identified by Dr. Keith Baverstock concerning the operation of the CoRWM Committee and (ii) the role and personal contribution of Dr. Baverstock in delivering the corporate aims and objectives of CoRWM. To report the outcome of this review, and to provide recommendations to CoRWM's sponsoring Ministers".
	This follows receipt of representations from both the CoRWM Chair, Gordon MacKerron, and Dr. Keith Baverstock. Dr. Baverstock has been suspended from the Committee pending the outcome of this review.
	The review is being carried out by the independent assessor, approved by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA), who was involved in the CoRWM appointments process. The assessor will be considering the information provided by relevant parties in arriving at his recommendations to Ministers.
	Subsequent to the commissioning of this review, Professor David Ball informed Defra that he has voluntarily suspended himself from CoRWM's activities while the situation giving rise to Dr. Baverstock's suspension is resolved.
	In the meantime CoRWM's work continues unchanged from the programme set out in its First Annual Report 2004, available on its website—www.corwm.org.uk. This will lead to the Committee publishing its short list of options and proposed assessment methodology for public and stakeholder consultation during the course of March 2005.

Climate Change

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what funding was allocated to programmes dealing with (a) the risk of human-induced climate change, (b) assessment of the impact of climate change on the environment and (c) identification of mitigation and adaptation options for climate change since 1997; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: The Department's climate change science research programme analyses the risk of human-induced climate change, assesses its potential impacts, and means of adaptation and mitigation. The following table details this research programme's spend over the last three financial years.
	
		
			   £ 
			   Financial year Cost of research assessing the risk of human-induced climate change Cost of research assessing the impact of climate change and identification of mitigation and adaptation options 
		
		
			 2002–03 9,780,160 3,143,938 
			 2003–04 10,484,174 3,562,397 
			 2004–05 11,732,070 3,947,992 
		
	
	Information for the financial year 1996–97 to 2001–02 is not available without disproportionate costs of retrieval. It is impossible to separate climate change impacts and adaptation research as these are complementary. An aggregate figure, therefore, describing research spend on both impacts (b) and adaptation/mitigation (c) has been presented. Data presented for the financial year 2004–05 are estimates of expected annual spend.

Countryside Agency

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what criteria she is using to determine the location of the new headquarters of the Countryside Agency; and whether premises in Cheltenham are under consideration.

Alun Michael: The Secretary of State announced in Rural Strategy 2004 that the 'new' Countryside Agency would in due course be located in a "lagging" rural area. For these purposes, "lagging" rural areas will be defined by reference to those local authority districts demonstrating poor economic performance in their rural economies, as set out in Annex B to Defra's Public Service Agreement 2004 (see www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/busplan/tn.pdf). As Rural Strategy 2004 sets out, poor economic performance is both affected by, and affects, social exclusion.
	The annex above lists the geography of poor economic performance in rural England as follows:
	
		
			 Region 1. Rural districts with consistently poor rural economic performance 2. Other urban or rural districts containing significant poor rural economic performance 
		
		
			 1.SE 1. Shepway 1. New Forest 
			  2. Isle of Wight 2. Wealden 
			  3. Swale — 
			  4. Dover — 
			  5. Rother — 
			
			 2.SW 1. Kerrier 1. West Somerset 
			  2. Penwith 2. West Dorset 
			  3. Carrick 3. Sedgemoor 
			  4. Caradon 4. Teignbridge 
			  5. Restormal — 
			  6. North Cornwall — 
			  7. Torridge — 
			  8.North Devon — 
			  9. West Devon — 
			  10. Forest of Dean — 
			
			 3.EoE 1. North Norfolk 1. Great Yarmouth 
			  2.Fenland 2. Peterborough 
			  3. Breckland 3. Forest Heath 
			  4. Tendring 4. Waveney 
			  5. Kings Lynn and West Norfolk — 
			
			 4.WM 1. Oswestry 1. Staffordshire Moorlands 
			  2. Herefordshire 2. North Warwickshire 
			  3. South Shropshire 3. Wychavon 
			  4. North Shropshire — 
			
			 5.EM 1. East Lindsay 1. Bassetlaw 
			  2. West Lindsay 2. Newark and Sherwood 
			  3. High Peak 3. Derbyshire Dales 
			  4. South Holland — 
			  5. Bolsover — 
			
			 6.NW 1. Copeland 1. Lancaster 
			  2. Allerdale 2. Carlisle 
			  3. Eden 3. Pendle 
			  4. West Lancashire 4. Crewe and Nantwich 
			  — 5. South Lakeland 
			  — 6. Ribble Valley 
			
			 7.YH 1. Scarborough 1. Craven 
			  2. East Riding 2. Barnsley 
			  3. North Lincolnshire 3. Wakefield 
			  — 4. Doncaster 
			  — 5. Harrogate 
			  — 6. Selby 
			  — 7. Hambleton 
			 8.NE 1. Sedgefield 1. Redcar and Cleveland 
			  2. Wear Valley 2. Tynedale 
			  3. Derwentside 3. Castle Morpeth 
			  4. Alnwick 4. Darlington 
			  5. Berwick — 
			  6. Teesdale — 
		
	
	We are looking forward to receiving proposals shortly from the agency, taking into account the Government's policy priorities set out in Rural Strategy 2004 and the objectives of the 'new' Countryside Agency, that will enable an early decision to be made on the new location.

Deer

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the number of wild deer in the UK, broken down by breed.

Ben Bradshaw: The following are mid-1990s estimates of wild deer numbers in Britain by species 1 .
	
		
			 Species Number 
		
		
			 Red deer 360,000 
			 Roe deer 500,000 
			 Fallow deer 100,000 
			 Sika Deer 11,500 
			 Muntjac 40,000 
			 Chinese Water deer 480–650 
		
	
	1 From Harris S, Morris P, Wray S, and Yalden D. (1995) A review of British Mammals. JNCC, Peterborough. Quoted in "Current and Future Deer Management Options," Defra December 2003.

Disability Discrimination Act

Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the application of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to access to the countryside, with particular reference to the use of gates and stiles.

Alun Michael: The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ensures that private or public landowners, who are "service providers", will be subject to the provisions of the Act. Service providers are required to take reasonable steps to remove, alter or provide a reasonable means of avoiding physical features.
	As far as rights of way are concerned, we believe that this will apply to features such as stiles and gates—which might act as barriers to disabled people accessing their services—since the provision and maintenance of these is the landowner's responsibility. However, it is not clear at this stage what "reasonable steps" would mean in practice and this will probably only be established by case law.
	Section 69 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 provides for the Secretary of State to issue guidance on how the powers to authorise works are to be exercised. We plan to issue this guidance later this year and will consider using this opportunity to issue guidance on the application of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
	As regards access to open country under Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, we believe that landowners are unlikely to be service providers under the Disability Discrimination Act just because their land has been designated under this part of the Act. Landowners may become service providers if they voluntarily provide signs, gates, stiles or other infrastructure to support the right of access, but there is no case law in this area. If the courts decide that the Disability Discrimination Act does
	apply in these circumstances, then we would expect "reasonable steps" to take account of factors like cost, land management, privacy and the level of demand from local disabled people

EU Committees

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Gambia) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Greenland) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(3)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Guinea) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(4)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Guinea Bissau) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(5)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Cape Verde) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(6)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Comoros) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(7)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Côte d'Ivoire) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(8)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Estonia) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(9)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Angola) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(10)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Argentina) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(11)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch residency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EC-Russia) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(12)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch Presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Sao Tomé and Principe) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(13)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Senegal) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(14)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Seychelles) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(15)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Madagascar) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(16)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch Presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Morocco) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(17)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Mauritania) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(18)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EC-Poland) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(19)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch residency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC- Equatorial Guinea) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(20)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Mauritius) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(21)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch Presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Latvia) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;
	(22)  how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Fisheries Joint Committee (EEC-Lithuania) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement;

Ben Bradshaw: The UK did not attend any of the Joint Committees (except that for EU-Greenland) listed in these questions as we have no fishing interest in these waters. Records about these meetings are not held by my Department. The meetings of the EU/Greenland Joint Committee took place on 28 September 2004 and 1–2 February 2005. The discussions were about the operation of the Fourth EU/Greenland Protocol. The UK was represented by a Defra official.
	There are no bilateral fisheries agreements between Estonia, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Argentina and Morocco.

EU Meetings

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Standing Committee on Propagating Material and Plants of Fruit Genera and Species met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if she will make a statement.

Alun Michael: The Standing Committee on Propagating Material and Plants of Fruit Genera and Species met once during the Italian presidency on 14 October 2003; once during the Irish presidency on 2 April 2004; and once during the Dutch presidency on 18/19 October 2004. All the meetings took place in Brussels and were attended by an official from the Department's Plant Health Division and also, in the case of the meeting on 18/19 October 2004. a scientific adviser from the Central Science Laboratory.
	The mandate of the Committee is to consider and adopt measures to facilitate implementation of Council Directive 92/34/EEC on the marketing of fruit propagating material and fruit plants intended for fruit production. The UK's priorities are to secure arrangements which are proportionate and facilitate access to a wide range of healthy propagating material, and provide increased opportunities for UK trade while ensuring co-ordination with the parallel EU plant health regime. The Committee's agendas and meeting reports are available on the European Commission's website at http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/rc/scpfgs/index en.h tml.
	A series of Command Papers on prospects for the EU—Cm6174 laid in April 2004, Cm6310 laid in September 2004 and Cm6450 laid in February 2005. which cover the periods for the above presidencies are available on the FCO website at http://www.fco.gov.uk/commandpapers.

Greenhouse Gases

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the levels of greenhouse gases emitted by the UK were in each of the last 10 years; and what levels were emitted during that period by other EU countries.

Elliot Morley: The following table contains the most recent greenhouse gas emissions estimates, in million tonnes of carbon equivalent per year, for each of the EU-15 countries and for the ED-15 collectively from the European Environment Agency.
	
		
			 Member state 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 
		
		
			 Austria 21.27 22.36 20.45 20.45 20.73 21.55 22.64 
			 Belgium 39.82 40.64 40.36 40.09 41.45 42.27 43.36 
			 Denmark 18.82 21.55 19.91 20.73 21.82 21.00 24.55 
			 Finland 21.00 20.45 19.64 19.64 21.55 20.73 22.36 
			 France 154.09 160.64 157.91 151.64 150.55 152.73 157.09 
			 Germany 340.64 326.18 312.55 308.45 302.18 300.27 305.18 
			 Greece 28.64 28.64 28.91 29.18 29.73 30.00 31.09 
			 Ireland 14.45 14.73 15.00 15.00 15.55 15.82 16.09 
			 Italy 138.82 139.36 138.00 136.36 134.45 143.18 141.00 
			 Luxemburg 3.55 3.55 3.55 3.55 3.55 2.73 2.73 
			 Netherlands 57.55 59.45 59.45 60.27 60.55 61.36 63.82 
			 Portugal 15.82 16.36 17.45 16.91 17.18 18.27 17.73 
			 Spain 77.73 79.36 81.82 78.82 82.91 86.18 84.55 
			 Sweden 19.64 19.64 19.64 19.64 20.45 20.18 21.00 
			 United Kingdom 202.64 202.91 196.64 191.18 189.82 187.09 193.09 
			 EU-15 1,153.91 1,156.09 1,131.00 1,111.64 1,112.45 1,123.36 1,146.27 
		
	
	
		
			 Member state 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 
		
		
			 Austria 22.36 22.36 21.82 22.09 22.91 23.18 
			 Belgium 40.91 42.27 40.36 40.91 40.64 40.91 
			 Denmark 22.09 20.73 19.91 18.55 18.82 18.55 
			 Finland 22.09 21.27 21.00 20.45 22.09 22.36 
			 France 154.91 159.00 153.82 152.18 153.27 151.09 
			 Germany 295.09 288.00 278.18 277.09 280.09 277.09 
			 Greece 32.73 33.82 33.82 35.45 36.82 36.82 
			 Ireland 16.91 17.45 18.00 18.55 19.09 18.82 
			 Italy 142.64 145.91 147.27 148.36 151.09 151.09 
			 Luxemburg 2.45 2.18 2.45 2.73 2.73 3.00 
			 Netherlands 59.45 61.09 58.09 58.09 58.91 58.36 
			 Portugal 18.55 19.64 21.82 21.27 21.27 22.36 
			 Spain 90.27 93.00 100.91 105.00 104.45 109.09 
			 Sweden 19.91 19.91 19.09 ' 18.55 18.55 19.09 
			 United Kingdom 186.55 185.18 176.73 176.73 178.91 173.18 
			 EU-15 1,126.91 1,131.82 1,113.27 1,116.00 1,129.64 1,125.00 
		
	
	The data, expressed as million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent per year, are published in the "Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2002 and inventory report 2004", which is available from the European Environment Agency (http://www.eea.eu.int/main html).
	The estimates differ a little from those published in the Consultation Paper for the Review of the Climate Change Programme because the latter contain estimates for emissions due from land use change, which are not included in the comparative data from the European Environment Agency, and because of revisions to the emission factors for coal used in power stations and for natural gas, as described in the Consultation Paper.

Globalisation

John MacDougall: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps she is taking to assess the impact of globalisation on UK manufacturing.

Douglas Alexander: The White Paper "Trade and Investment: Making Globalisation a Force a Good" published in July 2004 analyses the growth of globalisation and the challenges it poses. In the same month we published a review of the Manufacturing Strategy setting out a framework for action to address this and other challenges facing manufactures in the UK. It focuses on support for innovation and skills, and helping industry to produce smarter, higher value-added products. This message is reinforced in The DTI Five Year Programme, published in November 2004, which sets out the Government's approach to help British companies succeed in today's challenging global economy.

Corporate Responsibility

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what duty of care there is on corporate directors to take account of the consequences to (a) communities, (b) the environment, (c) health and safety of employees and (d) shareholders of decisions they take.

Jacqui Smith: Directors owe fiduciary duties and duties of care and skill to the company.
	In fulfilling these duties, a director will need, where relevant, to consider the impact of the company's operations on the community and on the environment. Directors can, in certain circumstances, be personally guilty of a health and safety offence (under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974),
	The Company Lay Reform Bill, draft clauses of which will be published this session, will include a statutory statement of director's general duties. This will require each director to act in the way that he or she concludes is most likely to achieve the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole. The director's duties will be owed to, and enforceable by the company.

Equal Pay

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Minister for Women what steps the Government are taking to close the pay gap between men and women; and if she will make a statement.

Jacqui Smith: As well as setting up the Women and Work Commission, the Government has led by example with all 88 Government Departments and Agencies having conducted equal pay reviews. This is reinforced by our target of 45 per cent. of large organisations having carried out equal pay reviews by 2008.
	I am pleased that the Equal Opportunities Commission in Scotland have recently launched into occupational segregation.

Commission on Equality and Human Rights

Mark Lazarowicz: To ask the Minister for Women what progress is being made towards the establishment of a Commission on Equality and Human Rights.

Patricia Hewitt: I am very pleased that the Government has today published a Bill to establish the Commission for Equality and Human Rights, which will play a key part in realising our vision of a fair, cohesive and prosperous society based on opportunity for all, respect for all and good relations between communities.

Ministerial Visits (Expenses)

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister what proportion of the costs of his visits to UK towns and cities since 1 January have been met from public funds; and what the total sum spent from public funds has been.

Tony Blair: Since 1 January I have made official visits to 17 UK towns and cities. The cost to public funds of these visits, for which figures are available, is £13,350. The Labour Party meets any costs incurred on party political business.
	I travel making the most efficient and cost-effective arrangements. My travel arrangements are in accordance with the arrangements for official travel set out in Chapter 7 of the Ministerial Code, and the accompanying guidance document, "Travel by Ministers".

Judicial System

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost of running the justice system was in (a) 1995, (b) 1997, (c) 1999, (d) 2001 and (e) 2003; and what the expected cost is in 2005–06.

Paul Goggins: Three Government Departments, the Home Office, Department for Constitutional Affairs and the Office of the Attorney General (including the Crown Prosecution Service) are jointly responsible for the justice system.
	HM Treasury regularly publish statistics on public expenditure which are freely available via the HM Treasury's website at http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/economic data and tools/finance spending statistics/pes publications.
	The three Departments also publish annual departmental and other reports, which give comprehensive information about delivery and service improvements.
	The overall cost of the "justice system" as a whole, including the administration of justice, policing and offender management was:
	
		
			  £ million 
			  Overall cost 
		
		
			 1995–96 13,352 
			 1997–98 14,318 
			 1999–2000 15,099 
			 2001–02 18,340 
			 2003–04 (estimate) 22,227 
		
	
	The figures presented are a mix of cash and accruals. All outturn figures up until 1997–98 are on a cash accounting basis. Outturn figures for 1999–2000 and 2001–02 are on an accruals basis, as is the estimated outturn data for 2003–04.
	The expected costs of the "justice system" in 2005–06 have not yet been finalised and are subject to central and local government financial planning rounds.
	Note:
	The historical figures used in this answer are taken from the HM Treasury Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses 2004 and 2001–02.

Personation

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps his Department takes to prevent fraud against private enterprises by people impersonating individuals known to be dead.

Des Browne: The Home Office-led Identity Fraud Steering Committee, which comprises public and private sector organisations that are committed to reducing identity fraud, began a project in November 2004 to explore the benefits, feasibility and legal impediments of sharing public sector deceased person information with private sector organisations involved in fraud prevention. The organisations involved are the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and CIFAS—the UK's Fraud Prevention Service. CIFAS membership includes more than 200 companies covering sectors such as financial services, utilities and insurance.
	The first phase of the project involved a sample of 50confirmed impersonation of deceased (IOD) cases. These were processed against ONS data on deceased people to establish whether the fraud could have been detected and prevented had the ONS data been available to CIFAS members when the fraudsters' applications were processed. The project found that sharing this data would not have a significant impact on reducing this type of fraud.
	The second phase of the project is exploring the benefits of sharing deceased person data held by DWP to reduce deceased person fraud. This includes confirming whether the data held by DWP would help to reduce IOD fraud; running the same cases of IOD fraud (as used in the first phase) against the information held by DWP; and establishing whether any "showstoppers" or legal impediments exist that would prevent DWP data on deceased people from being shared with the private sector.
	Initial results suggest that sharing DWP data may help to reduce IOD fraud, but further work is needed to evaluate the benefits that could be obtained. This work is now under way along with an examination of any possible legal impediments to sharing the data.

Departmental Policies

George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to Islington, south and Finsbury constituency, the effects on Islington, south and Finsbury of her Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997.

Richard Caborn: The Department's aim is to improve the quality of life for everyone through cultural and sporting activities, to support the pursuit of excellence and to champion the tourism, creative and leisure industries. The Department's policies and actions have had a significant impact on Islington south and Finsbury since 2 May 1997.
	In order to achieve our challenging targets for increased participation in sport and physical activity, we have invested in thousands of new and refurbished public sports facilities. In 2002 we launched the first ever comprehensive national physical education, school sport and club links strategy with an investment of £459 million. There are two school sport partnerships based in Islington south and Finsbury, involving three school sport co-ordinators and 27 primary link teachers. To achieve our challenging targets for increased participation in sport and physical activity, we have invested in thousands of new and refurbished public sports facilities. Sports facilities in Islington south and Finsbury have benefited from four Sport England community capital lottery grants totalling £4,792,287, and a further two awards worth £875,736 in total from the £108 million investment in innovative sports facilities through the Active England programme.
	We have increased our national funding to the arts in real terms by 60 per cent. from £199 million in 1998–99 to £367 million in 2004–5. Between 1998–99 and 2003–04, funding to Arts Council England, London increased from £13.6 million to £133.8 million, including from 1 April 2003, funding to major national arts organisations in London. In 2005–06 the total Arts Council England, London investment in regularly funded organisations will be £151.6 million. Islington south and Finsbury has benefited from grants to arts organisations and individuals, including the Almeida theatre and the Union Chapel Project: "Ten Feet Away".
	Schools in Islington south and Finsbury were included in the first phase of the Creative Partnerships programme which began in 2002. Creative Partnerships aims to give school children and their teachers the opportunity to explore their creativity by working on sustained projects with creative organisations and individuals, including artists, theatre companies, dance studios, museums, orchestras, film-makers and historic buildings. Funding of £65 million was allocated for the period 2002–05 to develop creative partnerships, and the programme will receive at least a further £86 million in 2005–08.
	Culture Online was launched in 2002 to increase access to, and participation in, arts and culture. Many of its projects are aimed at children of school age and at audiences that might not otherwise participate in arts and culture, including those who do not easily have access to arts and culture, people from deprived communities and people with particular educational or physical needs. People in Islington south and Finsbury will be among those who benefit from Culture Online. Between 2002 and 2004, £13 million was allocated to fund 20 Culture Online projects.
	Through our commitment to public service broadcasting we have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secure funding base for the BBC and Channel 4, while giving them the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support their public service remit. The Communications Act 2003 includes provisions to ensure that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.
	Our support for, and promotion of, the film and broadcasting industries have contributed to the general success of film-making and television activity in the Islington south and Finsbury area. The UK Film Council's First Light initiative for young film-makers aged between 11 and 18 has supported a number of initiatives in Islington, including providing a grant of £30,000 to the "All Change Arts" organisation for the making of five films in which 95 young people were involved. Film London provided a £10,000 lottery grant to the Film and Video Workshop. The Human Rights Watch Festival, also based in Islington, received £5,000.
	In November 2000 we introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available. However, according to Department for Work and Pensions records, the number of households in the Islington south and Finsbury constituency with at least one person aged 75 or over claiming the winter fuel payment in 2003–4 was 3,505.
	We have changed the licensing laws to allow people to hold and attend commercial dances on Sunday, to make it easier for restaurants to open an hour later, and to relax the alcohol licensing hours from 11pm on new year's eve to 11am on new year's day in all future years; and we have given the police greater powers to take action against under-age drinking and disorderly and noisy licensed premises. The Licensing Act 2003, when fully implemented, will introduce a streamlined, consistent and fair licensing regime for the provision of alcohol, public entertainment and late night refreshment. It will provide greater choice for consumers, bring regeneration and increased employment opportunities and protect local residents whose lives have been blighted by disturbance and antisocial behaviour.
	The Gambling Bill will, when implemented, transfer responsibility for licensing gambling premises to local authorities. Local people and businesses will be able to make representations about applications for licenses and local authorities will be able to decide not to issue licenses for casino premises. These changes will give local communities, including those in Islington south and Finsbury, a greater say in the regulation of gambling in their area.
	Tourism across London has benefited from Government-funded marketing activity. In April 2003 we established VisitBritain with a new domestic marketing remit for England, and its successful marketing activities in promoting Britain abroad as an attractive tourist destination, benefit all parts of the country, including Islington south and Finsbury. Responsibility for the promotion of tourism in London was devolved to the Mayor of London and the Greater London Authority (GLA) under the Greater London Authority Act 1999. Since 2000–01, DCMS has worked with the Mayor and the GLA to fund marketing and tourism development activities in London. Data on the precise effect of this support for tourism in Islington south and Finsbury is not held centrally.
	English Heritage has awarded grants worth £1,567,929 to Islington south and Finsbury since 2 May 1997, including £1,121,654 to the London borough of Islington for the Keystone Crescent Conservation Area Partnership Scheme (£159,691 in 1997), the Caledonian Road and Chapel Market Heritage Economic Regeneration Schemes (£459,698 from 1997 to 2004) and funding for specialist conservation posts (£502,265 from 1997 to 2003).
	In common with all those in the United Kingdom, the public library branches in Islington south and Finsbury are connected to the Internet through the People's Network which was funded through a £120 million lottery grant and which has put all the United Kingdom's public libraries on-line. In addition, the Department is funding the museums, libraries and archives council with £5 million over three years to implement the Framework for the Future Action Plan and Library Improvement Programme, which is designed to encourage improvement across the public libraries sector in England.
	Information from the national lottery distributors indicates that since 2 May 1997 Islington south and Finsbury constituency has benefited from 868 awards totalling over £189 million. Of these, 55 awards worth over £44 million were made by the New Opportunities Fund which was established by the Government in 1999. The New Opportunities Fund merged with the Community Fund in June 2004 to form the Big Lottery Fund.

Licensing

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what powers the police have to object to the licensing of a night club.

Richard Caborn: There is no legal definition of a "nightclub". Under the current licensing regime the police may object to the licensing justices about the grant or renewal of a justices' licence authorising the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises. They may also object to the grant of a special hours certificate by the justices which authorises sales of alcohol outside of normal permitted hours until 2.00 a.m. in most of the country and until 3.00 a.m. in the west end of London. In order to obtain a special hours certificate, a nightclub must first obtain a public entertainment licence which authorises music and dancing and which is granted by the local authority. The police may also object to grant or renewal of this licence.
	The Licensing Act 2003 provides that responsible authorities, including the chief officer of police, may make representations about applications, including those by nightclubs, for provisional statements and about the grant or variation of premises licences. Responsible authorities may also apply for a review of a licence at any time as well as make representations about a review after it has been granted.
	Representations must be about the effects of the application on the promotion of the licensing objectives. Where a simple conversion of an existing licence is made under the grandfather rights provisions in schedule 8 of the Act then the chief officer of police may make representations based on crime and disorder grounds.

Interface Schools Initiative

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much each school in North Belfast has received under the Interface Schools Initiative in each year since it was introduced.

Barry Gardiner: Additional funds under Interface Programmes have been allocated to schools in North Belfast as follows:
	
		
			 Financial year/Schools £ 
		
		
			 Recurrent funding  
			 2001–02  
			 Holy Cross Girls' Primary 75,000 
			 Wheatfield Primary 46,000 
			   
			 (From December 2001)  
			 Ballysillan Primary 5,000 
			 Cliftonville Primary 5,000 
			 Currie Primary 5,000 
			 Grove Primary 5,000 
			 Holy Cross Boys' Primary 5,000 
			 Holy Family Primary 5,000 
			 Lowood Primary 5,000 
			 Mercy Primary 5,000 
			 Our Lady's Deanby Gardens Primary 5,000 
			 Sacred Heart Primary 5,000 
			 St. Mary's Star of the Sea Primary 5,000 
			 St. Patrick's Primary 5,000 
			   
			 (From March 2002)  
			 Ben Mhadagain Prep 5,000 
			 Bunscoil Bheann Mhadagain 5,000 
			 Carr's Glen Primary 5,000 
			 Cavehill Primary 5,000 
			 Cedar Lodge Special Primary 5,000 
			 Edmund Rice (Christian Bros) Primary 5,000 
			 Ligoniel Primary 5,000 
			 Our Lady of Lourdes Primary 5,000 
			 Seaview Primary 5,000 
			 St. Gabriel's College 5,000 
			 St. Therese of Lisieux Primary 5,000 
			 St. Vincent de Paul Primary 5,000 
			 Star of the Sea Girls' Primary 5,000 
			 Ballysilian Primary 20,000 
			 Ben Mhadagain Prep 5,000 
			 Bunscoil Bheann Mhadagain 20,000 
			 Carr's Glen Primary 20,000 
			 Cavehill Primary 20,000 
			 Cedar Lodge Special Primary 20,000 
			 Cliftonville Primary 20,000 
			 Currie Primary 20,000 
			 Edmund Rice (Christian Bros) Primary 20,000 
			 Grove Primary 20,000 
			 Holy Cross Boys' Primary 20,000 
			 Holy Cross Girls' Primary 185,000 
			 Holy Family Primary 20,000 
			 Ligoniel Primary 20,000 
			 Lowood Primary 20,000 
			 Mercy Primary 20,000 
			 Our Lady of Lourdes Primary 20,000 
			 Our Lady's Deanby Gardens Primary 20,000 
			 Sacred Heart Primary 20,000 
			 St. Gabriel's College 5,000 
			 St. Mary's Star of the Sea Primary 20,000 
			 St. Patrick's Primary 20,000 
			 St. Therese of Lisieux Primary 20,000 
			 St. Vincent de Paul Primary 20,000 
			 Seaview Primary 20,000 
			 Star of the Sea Girls' Primary 20,000 
			 Wheatfield Primary 206,000 
			   
			 2003–04  
			 Ballysilian Primary 5,000 
			 Bunscoil Bheann Mhadagain 5,000 
			 Carr' s Glen Primary 5,000 
			 Cavehill Primary 5,000 
			 Cedar Lodge Special Primary 5,000 
			 Cliftonville Primary 5,000 
			 Currie Primary 27,850 
			 Edmund Rice (Christian Bros) Primary 5,000 
			 Grove Primary 5,000 
			 Holy Cross Boys' Primary 5,000 
			 Holy Cross Girls' Primary 127,010 
			 Holy Family Primary 125,000 
			 Ligoniel Primary School 5,000 
			 Lowood Primary 5,000 
			 Mercy Primary 5,000 
			 Our Lady's Deanby Gardens Primary 5,000 
			 Our Lady of Lourdes Primary 5,000 
			 Sacred Heart Primary School 5,000 
			 St. Mary's Star of the Sea Primary 5,000 
			 St. Patrick's Primary 5,000 
			 Sea view Primary 5,000 
			 St. Therese of Lisieux Primary 5,000 
			 St. Vincent de Paul Primary 5,000 
			 Star of the Sea Girls' Primary 5,000 
			 Wheatfield Primary 84,350 
			   
			 2004–05  
			 Currie Primary 37,742 
			 Holy Cross Girls' Primary 91,618 
			 Holy Family Primary 106,083 
			 Ligoniel Primary 10,000 
			 Our Lady of Mercy Secondary 78,500 
			 Wheatfield Primary 88,900 
			   
			 Capital funding  
			 2002–03  
			 Holy Cross Girls' PS—2 buses 120,000 
			 Wheatfield Primary 100,000 
			   
			 2003–04  
			 Currie Primary 37,000 
			 Wheatfield Primary 45,000

Schools (Funding)

Roy Beggs: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what the projected outcome is of the new Common Funding Formula in each school sector in Northern Ireland.

Barry Gardiner: All grant-aided schools in Northern Ireland, covered by the Common Funding Scheme, have now received notification of their budget shares for the 2005–06 financial year. The information on allocations by management sector is shown in the following table:
	
		
			   £000 
			 Allocations by sector Total funding in 2004–05(6) Total common funding 2005–06(7) 
		
		
			 Education and Library Board—Controlled 350,659 380,830 
			 Education and Library Board—Maintained 318,380 347,753 
			 Voluntary grammar 168,017 182,112 
			 Grant-maintained integrated 38,719 43,205 
			 Total 875,775 953,900 
		
	
	(6) Figures taken from 2004–05 Budget Statements plus the Chancellor's ('Budget Addition') funding
	(7) Figures from Common Funding budget share allocations, including the Budget Addition.

Information Technology

Mark Oaten: To ask the Solicitor-General how the £600 million set aside for case management information technology in the Crown Prosecution Service referred to in the document Justice For All (2002) has been spent.

Harriet Harman: The £600 million in paragraph 9.47 of the White Paper "Justice for All", was allocated for modernisation of all Criminal Justice System information technology, not for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) alone. The CPS has paid £56.41 million since 1 January 2002 under its 10-year public finance initiative for its Case Management System COMPASS and for legacy system support.
	COMPASS was delivered on time, to specification and within budget. It has improved the way the Crown Prosecution Service works by:
	reducing paper handling, increasing focus on operational priorities;
	providing an infrastructure which facilitates enhanced communication with other criminal justice agencies.
	Over two million cases are registered on COMPASS with over 4,000 users accessing the system daily. It has delivered its contribution to the CJS IT targets and is the IT system selected to support the No Witness, No Justice initiative.

Newly-qualified Drivers

Peter Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what research his Department has conducted into the driving performance of newly-qualified drivers; and if he will make a statement.

David Jamieson: Details of the Department's programme of research on driver behaviour can be found on-line in the "Compendium of Road Safety Research Projects 2002/2003" at:
	www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft rdsafety/documents/page/dft rdsafety 022211 .hcsp.
	A number of projects have established that newly qualified drivers have a higher risk of collisions than older, more experienced drivers. Relevant research published recently includes:
	"Monitoring and evaluation of safety measures for new drivers" (TRL525) published in 2002 (www.trl.co.uk/static/dtlr/pdfs/TRL525.pdf);
	"Novice driver accidents and the driving test" (TRL527) published in 2002 (www.trl.co.uk/static/dtlr/pdfs/TRL527.pdf); and
	"In-depth accident causation study of young drivers" (TRL542) published in 2002 (www.trl.co.uk/static/dtlr/pdfs/TRL542.pdf).
	Copies of these documents are available in the Libraries of the House.
	The Department also has under way a "Cohort Study of Young and Novice Drivers" looking at the methods used by learners to organise their training and the results of that training in terms of test outcome, accidents and attitudes, aimed at further improving standards of new drivers'. The study updates and extends an earlier Cohort Study, carried out in the late 1980s, and the results will begin to be published from autumn 2005.

Public Consultations

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the public consultations undertaken by his Department and its predecessors since 1997.

Alistair Darling: The Department consults widely with stakeholders and customers to assist in policy development. Since it was established in May 2002 the Department has made written consultations available on its website at:
	http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft about/documents/page/dft consultation page. hcsp
	Current and closed consultations can be accessed from this site.
	Consultations are also undertaken by the Department's Executive Agencies and can be found on their own websites:
	Driving Standards Agency (DSA)
	http://www. dsa.gov.uk/Category.asp?cat=328
	Highways Agency(HA):
	http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/consult.htm
	In addition to these consultations the Highways Agency consults on Road schemes. Details of these can be found on the Road Projects section of their site:
	http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/
	Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA)
	http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-guidance-regulation/mcga-consultations.htm
	Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA)
	http://www. vosa.gov.uk/vosa/consultations/consultations.htm
	Vehicle Certification Agency (VGA)
	All consultations relate to Departmental initiatives and as such are included on the Department site.
	Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA)
	http://www. dvla.gov.uk/public/corporat.htm
	The DVLA website is being restructured so not all consultations are currently available. A list of all consultations since May 2002 is included in the following list:
	Consultations conducted by DVLA since May 2002
	Exchange of Republic of Korea driving licences
	Future of driver licensing arrangements for drivers of invalid carriages (NHS trikes)
	Reducing motorcycle evasion of vehicle excise duty (VED)
	Consultation on a harmonised vehicle registration document
	DVLA consultation on fee proposals—driving licences and vehicle registration
	DVLA consultation on fee proposals—driving licences and vehicle registration (follow up consultation)
	The establishment of a trading fund
	Consultation on Vehicle Number Plate Security
	International driving permit fees and driving licence charges
	Consultation on regulating the supply of number plates in Northern Ireland
	The future of the counterpart to the photocard driving licence
	Consultation on fees for the issue of digital tachograph cards
	Review of the registration of number plate suppliers—10 December 2004 Purpose and scope
	DVLA/Driver Vehicle Licensing Northern Ireland (DVLNI) consultation document on the convenience charge for credit card payments of vehicle excise duty (VED)
	DVLA consultation on fee proposals
	DVLA consultation on access to goods vehicle test record database for purposes of vehicle relicensing
	A review of the vehicle inspection procedures of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency and Driver and Vehicle Licensing Northern Ireland

Street Works

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the Answer of 21 February 2005, Official Report, column 214W, on street works, if he will place in the Library copies of the documents to which reference is made.

Charlotte Atkins: Copies of the report "Estimation of the Cost of Delay from Utilities' Street Works", carried out for the Department for Transport by Halcrow, were placed in the Libraries of the House on 14 October 2004.
	Copies of a report carried out for the National Joint Utilities Group on the same subject can be found at: http://www.transport.uwe.ac.uk/research/projects/njug-congestion.htm.

Basic Skills

Liam Byrne: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will deposit in the Library a copy of her Department's segmentation of the market for basic skills.

Ivan Lewis: In 2003 the Department published the "Skills for Life Survey: A national needs and impact survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT skills" (DfES, October 2003). The survey provides the latest estimates [mapped to the National Standards] of literacy, numeracy and ICT levels for adults aged 16 to 65 in England.
	While the Skills for Life programme offers high quality, free learning opportunities to all adults who want to improve their skills to Level 2, the survey findings have helped the Department to identify and target some key groups with low skills, including: unemployed people and benefit claimants; low-skilled people in employment; young adults who leave school and begin work with low skills; parents with low skills; and people who live in disadvantaged communities.
	A copy of the survey report has been placed in the House of Commons Library.

Departmental Policies (Croydon)

Geraint Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will set out, with statistical evidence relating as closely as possible to the Croydon, Central constituency, the effects of changes to departmental policy since 1997 on the Croydon, Central constituency.

Stephen Twigg: The Croydon, Central constituency lies within Croydon local education authority. The most recent Key Stage 2 and GCSE and equivalents Achievement for pupils attending schools in Croydon, Central are given in the following tables:
	
		Key Stage 2 Achievements of 11-year-old pupils attending schools in the Croydon, Central constituency Percentage of pupils gaining level 4 and above
		
			  1997 2004 Percentage point improvement 1997 to 2004 
		
		
			 Croydon, Central  
			 English(8) 60 79 19 
			 Maths(8) 58 70 12 
			 National average  
			 English(9) 63 78 15 
			 Maths(9) 61 74 13 
		
	
	(8) Pupils attending schools in Croydon, Central constituency
	(9) The average for all schools in England (including independent schools)
	
		GCSE and equivalents(10) Achievement of 15-year-old pupils(11) attending schools in the Rochdale constituency
		
			 Percentage of 15-year-olds gaining 1997 2004 Percentage point improvement 
		
		
			 Croydon, Central  
			 5+ A*–C 38.8 46.5 7.7 
			 5+ A*–G 81.4 90.1 8.7 
			 National average  
			 5+ A*–C 45.1 53.7 8.6 
			 5+ A*–G 87.0 88.8 1.8 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. For 2004 only results incorporate GCSEs, GNVQs and a wide range of other qualifications approved pre-16. Prior to 2004 results are based on GCSEs and GNVQs only.
	2. As standard the results reported relate to pupils aged 15 at the start of the academic year i.e. 31 August and therefore reaching the end of compulsory education at the end of the school year.
	At national level, standards have improved across all key stages. The Primary and Key Stage 3 National Strategies, together with the measures we have taken to help schools in the toughest areas are continuing to deliver better results.
	Further information by constituency, is provided within the Department's 'In Your Area' website available at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/inyourarea. Where information is not available at the constituency level it has been provided at local education authority level.
	This website allows users to access key facts and local information about education and skills based on postcodes. The data available within the site offers comparisons between 1997 and the latest available year and covers five geographies. These are parliamentary constituency, ward, local authority district, local education authority, Government office region. England figures are also provided.
	The information available within the website is grouped in a number of broad categories including Literacy and Numeracy at age 11, Literacy and Numeracy at age 14, GCSE/GNVQ results, Pupils with Special Educational Needs, School Initiatives, School Workforce, School Funding and Resources, Children's Social Services, Early Years, Class Sizes, Post 16, Higher Education and Adult Education
	Additional information could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, my Department is investigating ways in which we can disseminate more information about the effects of our policies at a local level. The In Your Area website will be further developed over the coming months to include additional information about Adult Education, School Funding, School Initiatives, School Performance, School Workforce and Post 16.

Fair Access

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list (a) the universities and (b) secondary schools which have been visited by (i) the Director General of the Office for Fair Access and (ii) other members of her staff.

Kim Howells: The Director of Fair Access and his staff have met or spoken with numerous institutions and sector bodies since OFFA was established in October 2004. In particular, a series of OFFA seminars were attended by most higher education institutions, and meetings have taken place with representative bodies, including Universities UK, the Standing Conference of Principals, the Association of Colleges, the Independent Schools Council, and the Secondary Heads Association.

Rochdale Students

Lorna Fitzsimons: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of 18 to 22-year-olds from Rochdale were studying at university (a) in 1997 and (b) at the latest date for which figures are available.

Kim Howells: Participation rates for each parliamentary constituency are not calculated by the Department. The most recent information shows the proportion of 18-year-olds from Rochdale local education authority who obtained places on full-time higher education courses via the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS), and this is shown in the table.
	
		Proportion of students aged 18 from Rochdale local education authority accepted through UCAS to full-time undergraduate courses in the UK
		
			 Academic year Percentage 
		
		
			 1996–97 16.3 
			 2003–04 18.0 
		
	
	In addition, HEFCE have recently published "Young participation in Higher Education", which shows the proportion of young people who enter higher education at age 18 or 19 by parliamentary constituency, although this only covers the years up to 2000. A discussion of the participation divisions between areas with high and low levels of participation, and trends (18-year-olds in 1994 to 18-year-olds in 2000) for constituencies is contained in the report (sections 2.12, 3.8 and 4.1).
	The figures indicate that the proportion of young people from Rochdale who entered higher education at age 18 or 19 was 24 per cent. in 1997 and 25 per cent. in 2000.

School Funding

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much the Government have allocated per child in (a) primary and (b) secondary schools in the Romford and Havering constituencies in 2004–05.

Stephen Twigg: The information requested is collected at local education authority level. Romford schools fall within Barking and Dagenham, Essex, Havering and Redbridge LEAs. The information requested is shown in the following table:
	
		Total cash funding per pupil by each LEA containing a school in Romford, 2004–05 £
		
			 LEA name Primary (3 to 10-year-olds) Secondary (11 to 15-year-olds) 
		
		
			 Barking and Dagenham 4,060 5,080 
			 Essex 3,460 4,360 
			 Havering 3,480 4,480 
			 Redbridge 3,750 4,580 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of education EPS settlements and include the pensions transfer to EPS and LSC.
	2. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DfES Departmental Expenditure Limits relevant to pupils aged 3–10 and 11–15 and exclude EMAs and grants not allocated at LEA level.
	3. The pupil numbers used to convert £ million figures to £ per pupil are those underlying the EPS settlement calculations.
	4. Figures are in cash terms rounded to the nearest £10 as reported by the LEA.
	5. 2004–05 figures are provisional as some grants have not yet been finalised/audited.

Schools (Essex)

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many private, independent and faith schools there are in Romford and Havering constituencies.

Stephen Twigg: The information requested is shown in the tables.
	
		All schools: Number of schools by religious character, January 2004:Romford parliamentary constituency and Havering local education authority
		
			  Romford parliamentary constituency 
			  Maintained nursery Maintained primary(25) Maintained secondary(25) Special 2 Pupil referral units Independent 
		
		
			 No religious character 0 19 3 0 0 1 
			 Church of England 0 2 1 0 0 0 
			 Roman Catholic 0 2 1 0 0 1 
			 Methodist 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Other Christian Faith(27) 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Jewish 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Muslim 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Sikh 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Total 0 23 5 0 0 3 
		
	
	
		
			  Havering local education authority 
			  Maintained nursery Maintained primary(25) Maintained secondary(25) Special 2 Pupil referral units Independent 
		
		
			 No religious character 0 55 14 3 3 3 
			 Church of England 0 2 1 0 0 0 
			 Roman Catholic 0 0 2 0 0 1 
			 Methodist 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Other Christian Faith(27) 0 0 1 0 0 3 
			 Jewish 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Muslim 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Sikh 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Total 0 65 18 3 3 7 
		
	
	(25) Includes middle schools as deemed.
	(26) Includes maintained and non-maintained special schools.
	(27) Includes schools of mixed denomination or other Christian beliefs.
	Source:
	Annual Schools' Census and EduBase

Targets

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the estimated cost to public funds is of achieving the Public Service Agreement target to make significant progress towards fair access into higher education.

Kim Howells: No estimate has been made of the cost to the public funds of achieving the Public Service Agreement target to make significant progress year on year towards fair access into higher education.
	The then Secretary of State for Education and Skills, Charles Clarke, made a statement to the House of Commons on 16 September 2004 about how expenditure announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his budget statement would be used to support the reforms set out in the Department's Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners.
	Concerning higher education, he explained that Government expenditure will increase by about £2 billion between 2004–05 and 2007–08, taking total investment to almost £9.5 billion.
	This means there will be average increases of over 6 per cent. in real terms over the next three years. These increases will cover the sector's financial needs in the short term.

A and E

Howard Flight: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  how many people attended an accident and emergency department in England in each quarter since March 2000;
	(2)  what the average percentage of patients seen in under four hours from arrival at an accident and emergency department to admission, transfer or discharge has been in each quarter since March 2000.

Rosie Winterton: Data on the number of attendances and the percentage of patients seen in four hours or less in accident and emergency departments are available on the Department's website at www.performance.doh.gov.uk/hospital activity/index.htm.
	Data for each quarter from 2001–02 for A&E attendances and for each quarter from quarter 2, 2002–03 for patients seen in less than four hours are available in the Library. Prior to this, information was published annually in "Outpatient and Ward Attenders, England", copies of which are also available in the Library.

Ambulance Response Times

Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average response time for ambulances attending 999 calls was in (a) Hartlepool and (b) England in each year since 1997.

Melanie Johnson: This information is not collected centrally in the format requested. Data on response times for North East Ambulance Service National Health Service Trust and for all ambulance services in England are shown in the table. The Welsh Assembly should be contacted for information on the Welsh Ambulance Service.
	Data are only available from the date trusts introduced call prioritisation. North East Ambulance Service introduced call prioritisation in 1999–2000. All ambulance services in England had introduced call prioritisation by 2001–02.
	Further information can be found in the statistical bulletin, "Ambulance services, England: 2003–04". A copy is available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.publications.doh.gov.uk/public/sb0411.htm.
	
		
			  North East England 
		
		
			 Percentage of category A calls responded within eight minutes 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 
			 1999–2000 50.1 n/a 
			 2000–01 50.8 n/a 
			 2001–02 72.3 70.8 
			 2002–03 76.6 74.6 
			 2003–04 75.6 75.7 
			
			 Percentage of category A calls responded within 14–19 minutes 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 
			 1999–2000 96.1 n/a 
			 2000–01 93.9 n/a 
			 2001–02 98.0 94.1 
			 2002–03 99.1 94.6 
			 2003–04 98.9 93.9 
			
			 Percentage of category B/C calls responded within 14–19 minutes 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 
			 1999–2000 93.0 n/a 
			 2000–01 90.3 n/a 
			 2001–02 94.7 90.2 
			 2002–03 96.0 89.6 
			 2003–04 95.1 87.5 
			
			 Percentage of urgent journeys with arrival time not more than 15 minutes late 
			 1997–98 91.5 88.0 
			 1998–99 85.4 84.0 
			 1999–2000 80.1 80.5 
			 2000–01 77.6 78.8 
			 2001–02 85.0 78.5 
			 2002–03 83.7 78.0 
			 2003–04 85.4 78.1 
		
	
	n/a = Not available

Care Standards

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many inspections of care homes were carried out in (a) 2003 and (b) 2004 under the auspices of the Care Standards Commission; how many were unannounced; and how many led to deregistration of care homes.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 28 February 2005
	Information on the number of inspections of care homes completed by the National Care Standards Commission in 2002–03 and 2003–04 is shown in the table.
	
		
			 Care home inspections 2002–03 2003–04 
		
		
			 Announced 25,800 24,645 
			 Unannounced 15,634 22,160 
			 Total 41,434 46,768 
		
	
	As of 24 February, the Commission for Social Care Inspection has completed 39,473 of the 44,674 care home inspections scheduled to be conducted by 31 March 2005. Of the 39,473 inspections, 20,440 were announced and 19,033 were unannounced.
	From 1 April 2004 to 24 February 2005, 2000 care homes have de-registered through inspection activity, home closure and change in ownership.

Cataract Operations (Wirral, South)

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on waiting times for cataract operations in Wirral, South.

Melanie Johnson: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Finished consultant admission episodes and average time waited for episodes with a cataract main operation in Wirral Hospital National Health Service Trust, 2003–04
		
			  Wirral Hospital NHS Trust England (all NHS trusts) 
		
		
			 Finished admission episodes 1,600 297,935 
			 Mean time waited (days) 157 148 
			 Median time waited (days) 142 127 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. A finished admission episode is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year. Figures given are for all admission methods.
	2. The main operation is the first recorded operation in the hospital episodes statistics (HES) data set and is usually the most resource intensive procedure performed during the episode. It is appropriate to use main operation when looking at admission details, eg time waited, but the figures for "all operations count of episodes" give a more complete count of episodes with an operation. OPCS4 codes C71-C72 and C74-C75 have been used for cataract operations.
	3. Time waited statistics from HES are not the same as the published waiting list statistics. HES provides counts and time waited for all patients admitted to hospital within a given period whereas the published waiting list statistics count those waiting for treatment on a specific date and how long they have been on the waiting list. Also, HES calculates the time waited as the difference between the admission and decision to admit dates. Unlike published waiting list statistics, this is not adjusted for self-deferrals or periods of medical/social suspension. Average time waited figures given are for waiting list and booked admissions.
	4. Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (ie the data are ungrossed).
	Source:
	HES, Department of Health.

Civil Servants

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost of the enhanced early retirement scheme for civil servants in his Department and its agencies was in each year from 1997–98 to 2003–04 and what the estimated cost will be in each year from 2004–05 to 2007–08; and if he will make a statement.

Rosie Winterton: The cost of enhanced exits in the Department of Health for financial years 1997–98 to 2003–04 are shown in the following table.
	
		
			 Financial year Total cost 1 (£000) 
		
		
			 1997–98 1,762 
			 1998–99 1,129 
			 1999–2000 2,303 
			 2000–01 2,023 
			 2001–02 3,200 
			 2002–03 16,964 
			 2003–04 9,201 
			 Total 36,582 
		
	
	(28) The total includes annual compensation payments, for those aged over 50, until they reach normal retirement age.
	The estimated costs for financial years 2004–05 to 2007–08 are shown in the following table.
	
		
			 Financial year Estimated costs (£000) 
		
		
			 2004–05 (29)34,076 
			 2005–06 3,000 
			 2006–07 3,000 
			 2007–08 3,000 
			 Total 43,076 
		
	
	(29) This estimate includes £6.67 million for NHS Estates and Inventures.

Dentistry

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of dentists in (a) each primary care trust and (b) each parliamentary constituency have stopped taking NHS patients in each year since 1997.

Rosie Winterton: The great majority of dental practices treat both private and national health service patients. The Office of Fair Trading report "The private dentistry market in the UK" published in March 2003 estimated that out of 11,000 dental practices about 210 are totally private, treating no NHS patients. Data on the percentages of complete leavers, by primary care trust and parliamentary constituency has been placed in the Library. The data do not take account of dentists who moved to other areas and continued to work in the general or personal dental services. The dentists could have ceased doing NHS work for a number of different reasons including retirement or leave to take a short-term absence. New contractual arrangements, which we are to introduce by April 2006, are intended to make NHS dentistry more attractive to dentists.

Mental Health

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the (a) median and (b) mean waiting times for patients waiting to see a consultant psychiatrist as (i) an outpatient first attendance and (ii) an elective inpatient admission were, in each year since 1997.

Rosie Winterton: The information requested is shown in the tables.
	
		Outpatient provider and commissioner waits for mental health specialities(30) quarterly from June 1996 (provider only) to December 2004 in England
		
			   Weeks 
			  Waited (seen) Provider Commissioner 
			  quarter Median Mean Median Mean 
		
		
			 1996–97 June 3.83 6.94 n/a n/a 
			 1996–97 September 3.81 7.04 n/a n/a 
			 1996–97 December 3.75 7.17 n/a n/a 
			 1996–97 March 3.86 6.74 n/a n/a 
			 1997–98 June 3.91 6.88 4.08 7.23 
			 1997–98 September 3.89 6.96 3.88 6.96 
			 1997–98 December n/a n/a 3.63 6.47 
			 1997–98 March 3.75 6.65 3.76 6.52 
			 1998–99 June 3.84 6.61 3.89 6.72 
			 1998–99 September 3.80 6.82 3.67 6.51 
			 1998–99 December 3.69 6.77 3.61 6.57 
			 1998–99 March 3.75 6.75 3.66 6.54 
			 1999–2000 June 3.90 6.66 3.81 6.58 
			 1999–2000 September 3.72 6.62 3.69 6.63 
			 1999–2000 December 3.73 6.65 3.61 6.40 
			 1999–2000 March 3.81 6.79 3.80 6.86 
			 2000–01 June 3.81 6.65 3.70 6.53 
			 2000–01 September 3.87 6.72 3.78 6.75 
			 2000–01 December 3.72 6.67 3.63 6.55 
			 2000–01 March 3.91 6.78 3.84 6.77 
			 2001–02 June 4.32 6.86 4.02 6.95 
			 2001–02 September 4.29 7.02 3.93 6.86 
			 2001–02 December 3.83 6.76 3.67 6.77 
			 2001–02 March 4.31 7.56 4.00 7.25 
			 2002–03 June 4.51 6.94 4.18 6.88 
			 2002–03 September 3.85 6.34 3.87 6.59 
			 2002–03 December 3.75 5.97 3.84 6.37 
			 2002–03 March 4.21 6.32 4.31 6.43 
			 2003–04 June 3.92 5.92 3.89 5.90 
			 2003–04 September 3.71 5.50 3.73 5.48 
			 2003–04 December 3.64 5.38 3.76 5.54 
			 2003–04 March 3.91 5.67 3.87 5.68 
			 2004–05(31) June 2.95 5.43 2.88 5.43 
			 2004–05(31) September 2.87 5.38 2.75 5.29 
			 2004–05(31) December 2.71 5.10 — — 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(30) Mental health specialists include mental illness, child and adolescent psychiatry, forensic psychiatry, psychotherapy and old age psychiatry.
	(31) Please note that after April 2004–05, the data has been provided using different time bands, which leads to a more accurate calculation of the mean and median.
	Source:
	Provider—QM08
	Commissioner—QM08R
	
		Inpatient provider and commissioner waits for mental health specialities(32) quarterly from June 1996 to December 2004 in England
		
			   Weeks 
			  Waited (seen) Provider Commissioner 
			  quarter Median Mean Median Mean 
		
		
			 1996–97 June 13.64 10.26 14.25 10.86 
			 1996–97 September 14.65 10.67 13.37 9.88 
			 1996–97 December 16.65 11.87 16.45 12.50 
			 1996–97 March 14.39 10.66 14.14 10.69 
			 1997–98 June n/a n/a 12.54 9.84 
			 1997–98 September n/a n/a 11.46 8.82 
			 1997–98 December n/a n/a 13.56 10.52 
			 1997–98 March 12.34 9.50 12.61 9.70 
			 1998–99 June 11.59 9.12 12.64 9.84 
			 1998–99 September 11.09 8.97 11.69 9.15 
			 1998–99 December 12.35 9.41 12.77 9.12 
			 1998–99 March 10.99 8.46 12.15 8.84 
			 1999–2000 June 12.70 9.81 12.19 9.40 
			 1999–2000 September 11.76 8.78 12.54 8.53 
			 1999–2000 December 11.93 8.95 13.03 8.58 
			 1999–2000 March 10.20 8.03 12.64 8.45 
			 2000–01 June 11.19 8.76 10.18 7.98 
			 2000–01 September 10.26 8.54 8.85 7.55 
			 2000–01 December 10.41 8.78 9.52 7.89 
			 2000–01 March 11.01 8.98 10.49 8.68 
			 2001–02 June 10.61 8.66 11.11 8.74 
			 2001–02 September 11.12 9.00 11.76 9.13 
			 2001–02 December 12.59 10.19 11.55 9.01 
			 2001–02 March 12.40 9.89 9.86 8.11 
			 2002–03 June 12.95 9.73 10.09 8.36 
			 2002–03 September 11.86 9.09 9.49 8.09 
			 2002–03 December 13.22 9.52 11.11 8.69 
			 2002–03 March 12.79 8.80 9.20 7.51 
			 2003–04 June 10.17 8.22 7.67 7.08 
			 2003–04 September 10.40 8.43 7.65 7.13 
			 2003–04 December 8.93 7.78 8.28 7.61 
			 2003–04 March 8.97 7.89 9.29 8.10 
			 2004–05(33) June 6.73 4.69 7.32 4.88 
			 2004–05(33) September 6.47 4.01 6.75 4.19 
			 2004–05(33) December 7.27 5.82 8.46 7.54 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(32) Mental health specialists include mental illness, child and adolescent psychiatry, forensic psychiatry, psychotherapy and old age psychiatry.
	(33) Please note that after April 2004–05, the data has been provided using different time bands which leads to a more accurate calculation of the mean and median
	Source:
	Provider—KH07
	Commissioner—QF01

NHS Injury Cost Recovery Scheme

Chris Mole: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the proposed expansion of the NHS Injury Cost Recovery Scheme.

Rosie Winterton: The Department recently completed a public consultation exercise on draft regulations to govern the operation of the expanded national health service injury costs recovery (ISR) scheme. Although the full analysis of the responses to the consultation is still under way, one of the key messages to come out of our initial scrutiny was that high levels of concern remain about the insurance market's ability to cope with the new changes. After further discussions, I have decided that now is not the right time to introduce the expanded scheme. However, we remain committed to the principle of "polluter pays" that underpins the ICR Scheme, and the expanded scheme will be introduced by October 2006.

Physical Activity

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much his Department has spent on advertising the benefits of physical activity in each of the last seven years.

Melanie Johnson: The Department and the national health service promote the benefits of physical activity in many ways to professionals, the public and other stakeholders. In particular, primary care trusts are required to have systematic and managed health promotion programmes, including action on exercise, that are responsive to local needs.
	In support of local delivery, we published a national quality assurance framework for exercise referral systems in 2001 and a report from the Chief Medical Officer, "At least five a week" in 2004 setting out evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health.
	The public health White Paper "Choosing health, making healthier choices easier" includes a commitment for a new cross-government campaign to raise awareness of the health risks of overweight and obesity, and the steps people can take through diet and physical activity to prevent obesity.

Surrey and Sussex (Health Inspection Bodies)

Crispin Blunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the bodies which inspect (a) the East Surrey hospital and (b) the Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust.

Rosie Winterton: The specific information requested is not held by the Department.
	However, 31 bodies have the right to inspect and regulate national health service hospital trusts in England. Of these, 18 are regulators of the professions and only have a role in inspecting training.
	The 31 bodies are as follows:
	Independent health regulators,
	Audit Commission,
	Healthcare Commission (formerly called the Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection),
	Monitor (formerly called the Independent Regulator of NHS Foundation Trusts),
	Health and Safety Executive,
	General Social Care Council,
	Health Development Agency*,
	Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority* (This will be incorporated into the Regulatory Authority for Fertility and Tissue by 2007–08, along with the Human Tissue Authority),
	National Audit Office,
	National Biological Standards Board*,
	National Health Service Appointments Commission,
	National Institute of Clinical Excellence,
	Commission for Social Care Inspection,
	The Commission for Patient and Public Health Involvement in Health*,
	Regulators of the Professions,
	General Chiropractic Council,
	General Dental Council,
	General Medical Council,
	General Optical Council,
	General Osteopathic Council,
	Health Professionals Council,
	Nursing and Midwifery Council,
	Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain,
	Royal College of Anaesthetists,
	Royal College of General Practitioners,
	Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists,
	Royal College of Ophthalmologists,
	Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health,
	Royal College of Pathologists,
	Royal College of Physicians,
	Royal College of Psychiatrists,
	Royal College of Radiologists,
	Royal College of Surgeons of England.
	Bodies indicated with a * will no longer exist in 2007–08.
	The Better Regulation Task Force defines an independent regulator as: "A body which has been established by Act of Parliament, but which operates at arm's length from Government and which has one or more of the following powers: inspection; referral; advice to a third party; licensing; accreditation; or enforcement."

Constitutional Treaty

Kate Hoey: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2005, Official Report, columns 902–03W, on the Constitutional Treaty, how the restrictions on Government publication of information under section 125 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 will be enforced.

Christopher Leslie: It is the responsibility of those to whom section 125 applies to ensure that they comply with the requirements of that provision. A person alleging a breach of section 125 could seek a judicial review.

Constitutional Treaty

Kate Hoey: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2005, Official Report, columns 902–03W, on the Constitutional Treaty, 
	(1)  what obligations there will be under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 for permitted participants in the referendum on the European Constitution to declare donations from the institutions of the European Union;
	(2)  what regulations will govern expenditure by UK-based organisations that are funded by the institutions of the European Union but are permitted participants in the referendum on the European Constitution.

Christopher Leslie: Donations to permitted participants are regulated by the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA). Donations must be declared to the Electoral Commission and can only be accepted if they are from permissible donors (except for donations of less than £200). A permissible donor can only be:
	an individual registered on a UK electoral register;
	a UK company;
	a UK trade union;
	a UK building society;
	a UK Limited Liability partnership;
	a UK friendly/building society;
	a UK based unincorporated association.
	a UK registered political party (in the case of a donation to a designated organisation or a registered political party which is not a minor party)
	In addition, powers in the European Union Bill may be used to include similar classes of donors for Gibraltar.
	Therefore donations of £200 or more from the institutions of the European Union to a permitted participant would have to be declared as impermissible donations and returned.
	All permitted participants are subject to referendum expenditure limits, set out in Schedule 14 to PPERA, namely: £5 million in the case of a designated organisation; between £500,000 and £5 million in the case of political parties; and £500,000 in other cases.

EU Committees

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Joint Co-operation Committee (EEC—ASEAN) met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Mullin: The EU Joint Co-operation Committee with the Association of South East Asian Nations did not meet during this period.

EU Committees

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the Joint Committee (i) EEC-Bangladesh, (ii) EC-Kingdom of Cambodia and (iii) EEC-China met; when and where these meetings took place; what UK Government expert was present; and if he will make a statement.

Denis MacShane: During this period the EC Joint Committee with Bangladesh met in Brussels on 19 November 2003 and the EC Joint Committee with China on 30 October 2003 in Beijing. The EC Joint Committee meeting with Cambodia did not meet during this period.
	As these Committees are chaired by the Commission, with support from the Presidency, there were no UK representatives at these meetings. However, the UK participated fully in formulating the EU's position for the meetings.

EU Committees

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times during the (a) Italian, (b) Irish and (c) Dutch presidency of the EU the (i) Joint Committee EEC-Mongolia, (ii) EC-Moldova Co-operation Committee and (iii) Joint Committee (EC-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) met; when and where these meetings took place; which UK Government expert was present; and if he will make a statement.

Denis MacShane: During this period, there were two meetings of the EU-Moldova Co-operation Committee—on 28 October 2003 in Chisinau and on 23 November 2004 in Brussels. There was one meeting of the Joint Committee on EEC-Mongolia on 4 November 2003 in Ulaanbaatar. As these meetings are chaired by the Commission, with support from the presidency, there were no UK representatives. However, the UK participated fully in formulating the EU's position for the meetings.
	There is no Joint Committee between the EC and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Technical dialogue between the EU and Macedonia now takes place in the annual meetings of the Stabilisation and Association Committee, which met for the first time in Skopje on 2–3 June 2004. Prior to the entry into force of the EU-Macedonia Stabilisation and Association Agreement on 1 April 2004, technical dialogue took place in the annual meetings of the Co-operation Council, which met for the last time in Brussels on 25 July 2003. The European Commission leads these technical dialogue meetings on behalf of the EU. Member states have the option of attending as observers. The UK sent an observer from the local UK mission to each of the meetings mentioned above.

EU Information Campaigns

Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 
	(1)  which EU budget lines in the EC draft budget for 2005 may be used for information campaigns; how much is allocated under each line; which projects under each line are operating in the United Kingdom; and which projects he intends to support within the United Kingdom as part of the EU Constitution debate;
	(2)  how much has been spent by the EU on PRINCE within the UK in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(3)  how much has been spent by the EU under the PRINCE information programme (a) on Economic and Monetary Union, (b) on the Debate on the Future of Europe and (c) under EC budget line 16 04 04 in the UK in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(4)  how much he estimates will be spent in the United Kingdom from EC budget lines (a) 2710, (b) 2719, (c) 2720 and (d) 2830 during the 2005–06 financial year;
	(5)  how much has been spent under EC budget line (a) 16 02 02 and (b) 16 03 01 in the UK in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(6)  what public relations campaigns the European Commission UK Representation has undertaken under EC budget line 16 03 01 in the last 12 months; and what campaigns are planned in the forthcoming year;
	(7)  what events the European Commission UK Representation has undertaken under EC budget line 16 03 01 in the last 12 months; and what events are planned in the forthcoming year;
	(8)  how much has been spent by the European Commission representation in the UK (a) under EC budget line 16 03 02 and (b) on priority communications under EC budget line 16 03 03 in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(9)  how much has been spent on (a) information and (b) communication tools by the European Commission UK Representation under EC budget line 16 04 02 in the UK in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(10)  how much his Department spent in partnership with the European Commission and its UK Representation in relation to EC budget line 16 04 02 in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(11)  what publications funded under EC budget line 16 04 02 were distributed in the UK during the last 24 months;
	(12)  how much has been spent on information outlets by the European Commission UK Representation under EC budget line 16 05 01 in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year;
	(13)  how much has been spent on special events by the European Commission under EC budget line 15 06 06 in the UK in each of the last five financial years; and how much is budgeted to be spent in the 2005–06 financial year.

Denis MacShane: The Institutions of the European Union are responsible for their own activities in terms of providing information to the public. Further details can be obtained from the UK Representations of the European Union's Institutions, contact details of which can be found at www.cec.org.uk, www.europarl.org.uk and www.europe.eu.int.

European Constitution

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 17 January 2005, Official Report, column 703W, on the European Union, what assessment the Government have made of whether the National Assembly for Wales, the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly, could be construed as national parliaments under the terms of Article 6 of Protocol 2 of the EU Constitutional Treaty.

Denis MacShane: The Government believes that the National Assembly for Wales, the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly are not "national parliaments" for the purposes of that Article.

Nepal

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what types of assistance have been given to the global conflict prevention pool since its inception in 2001 for the specific purpose of tackling the causes of the conflict in Nepal; if his Department will continue assistance to foster a democratic Nepalese state following the actions of King Gyanendra since 1 February 2004; and if he will make a statement.

Douglas Alexander: The global conflict pool has funded many activities aimed at tackling the underlying causes of conflict in Nepal. These causes include poverty, social injustice, corruption and human rights violations. We have funded the following activities to address them:
	Rural infrastructure programmes 2002–03
	Food support to communities in Maoist areas 2003–04
	Support for civilian human rights initiatives 2003–04
	Police reform 2003–04
	Human rights advisor 2003–04
	Assistance to the ICRC programme 2004–05
	Support to the Government peace unit 2004–05
	Political and conflict analysis 2004–05
	My right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence (Mr. Ingram) notified Parliament of the withdrawal of our proposed package of military assistance to Nepal on 21 February 2005, Official Report, columns 252–53W. In his reply to my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Clare Short) on Nepal he stated:
	"In light of the recent events in Nepal, the Government has decided to withdraw the minute relating to the gift of military equipment rending a full review of our policy with regard to the provision of military assistance and equipment to Nepal".
	We remain deeply concerned by the King's assumption of power on 1 February 2005. Such is the level of our concern that on 14 February the Foreign Secretary temporarily recalled our ambassador in Nepal for consultations. We will continue to work to secure a peaceful, durable and democratic resolution to the conflict. I have already made a statement calling for the immediate restitution of multi-party democracy. A copy of my statement is available on the FCO website www.fco.gov.uk/policy/news/press-releases.

Nepal

Clare Short: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will halt the provision of military equipment and training to the Government of Nepal following recent actions by King Gyanendra; what assessment he has made of reports of human rights abuses by the Nepali security forces; and if he will make a statement.

Douglas Alexander: The UK is deeply concerned by the King's assumption of power in Nepal on 1 February. Through the Global Conflict Prevention Pool, funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development, we have been providing non-lethal military assistance to Nepal including training and equipment to help enhance bomb disposal efforts and intelligence gathering capabilities, and to increase the accuracy of the army's legitimate counter insurgency operations.
	On 14 February my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary recalled our Ambassador in Nepal to London for consultations. Following those consultations with our Ambassador and other key international partners we decided to withdraw the proposal, laid before Parliament in a minute of 20 January 2005, for a further tranche of military assistance to Nepal. I refer my right hon. Friend to the reply my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Defence gave her on 21 February 2005, Official Report, columns 252–53W.
	We are deeply troubled by numerous credible reports of severe human rights violations by the Maoists and the Nepalese security forces. We have regularly criticised Nepal's poor human rights record. We have also funded projects working with the armed forces and the police to improve their understanding and respect for human rights. When I visited in Nepal in November 2004 I underlined the strong importance the UK attaches to human rights with all my interlocutors, including the King.

Student Visas

Anne Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what percentage of international visas issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were student visas in the last year for which figures are available.

Chris Mullin: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office issued 1,836,362 visas in the year from 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2004. Of these, 146,736 were issued to students. This is approximately 8 per cent. of the total of visas issued.
	Figures for April 2004-March 2005 are not yet available. When they are, they can be found, along with further entry clearance statistics, on the UK visas website at www.ukvisas.gov.uk-"Entry Clearance: Facts and Figures".

Uganda

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of (a) the visit to Uganda by the Iranian President Mohammad Khatami and (b) the level of support by President Museveni for the Iranian nuclear programme.

Chris Mullin: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) today (UIN 218287).

APW Pension Scheme

David Chidgey: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether pensioners who will retire after the wind-up of the APW pension scheme will qualify for the deemed buyback of guaranteed minimum pensions and have these benefits backdated to the date at which they retired at age 65.

Malcolm Wicks: Pensioners who retire after the wind-up of the APW Pension scheme may qualify for deemed buyback, providing the amount of scheme rights that are available in respect of the member (the Actual Transfer Value) is less than the amount required to restore State Scheme rights to the level they would have been had the member never been contracted-out (the Technical Amount).
	For those who qualify and opt for deemed buyback the state pension will be uprated from the "effective date" (as defined in regulation 1(2) of the Occupational Pension Schemes (Contracting-out) (Amount Required for Restoring State Scheme Rights and Miscellaneous Amendment) Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1397). The "effective date" is the date that the Secretary of State determines, for the purposes of Deemed Buyback, the extent to which the resources of the pension scheme are insufficient to meet the liability for the cash equivalent of the member's rights under the scheme.

Congestion Charge

George Osborne: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much has been spent on congestion (a) charges and (b) penalty charge notices by the Department since the commencement of the congestion charging scheme.

Maria Eagle: Where a congestion charge is incurred in the course of official business, the Department meets this cost. The information on cost is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	The Department incurs no costs relating to penalty charge notices incurred by civil servants.
	For information on congestion charges and penalty charges incurred by vehicles provided to Departments by the Government Car and Despatch Agency I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. Milburn) on 28 February 2005, Official Report, column 957W.

Council Tax Benefit

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the (a) savings limit and (b) disregards in the assessment of council tax benefit have been since 2001; and what assessment he has made of the financial consequences of introducing assessments of savings based on those used in pension credit.

Chris Pond: Prior to April 2001 the lower capital limit was £3,000 and the upper capital limit was £16,000 for all client groups. From April 2001 the lower capital limit for pensioners was raised to £6,000. From April 2006 the lower capital limit for working age people will be raised to £6,000 to bring it into line with that of pensioners. With the introduction of pension credit in October 2003 the amount of notional income that is assumed from capital, for pensioners has been halved from £1 in every £250 over the lower limit to £1 in every £500; there is no upper capital limit for those pensioners receiving the guarantee credit element of pension credit.
	If the savings rules for council tax benefit were changed to match those in pension credit, there would be some 160,000 additional beneficiaries at an estimated cost of £65 million.
	Notes:
	1. Beneficiaries are rounded to the nearest 10 thousand, costs to the nearest £5 million. 2. Each beneficiary represents a benefit unit, which can be a single claimant or a couple. 3. The impact is estimated using the DWP Policy Simulation Model for 2005–06. 4. This model is based on the 2002–03 Family Resources Survey data, up-rated to 2004–05 prices, benefit rates and earnings levels, and is calibrated to latest published forecasts and policies.

Growth Areas (Funding)

Phil Sawford: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what funding his Department has earmarked for growth areas to ensure that they have the resources required to meet the demands of a growing population.

Maria Eagle: The Department for Work and Pension's major expenditure (around £100 billion in 2005–06) is on benefits and pensions which are determined by a combination of need and entitlement conditions. Application of these factors will ensure that where appropriate our expenditure meets the demands of a growing population. The Department does not have any resource specifically earmarked for growth areas.

Pension Credit

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the take-up rate of the savings credit element of the pension credit; and how much savings credits remains unclaimed.

Malcolm Wicks: holding answer 28 February 2005
	National statistics on take-up of major DWP benefits are published annually by the Department in "Income Related Benefits: Estimates of Take-up". These are based on the Family Resources Survey (FRS) for the relevant year and take account of both entitled non-recipients and non-entitled recipients. However, they are published significantly in arrears and the 2004–05 statistics will not be available for some time.
	Take-up for private households entitled to the savings element of pension credit is of the order of 60 per cent. This figure does not include those in residential care or nursing homes. It is derived by comparing administrative and survey sources, which are not directly comparable. No meaningful robust figures for the savings element unclaimed can be derived in this way. Indeed any take-up figure derived this way is indicative only.